stall

The San Fernando Valley has lost many of the great spots that made it a hot dog mecca over the years — among them, the Weiner Factory, Rubin’s Red Hot, Vicious Dogs, QT Chicago Dogs and the Infield, late home of the fried Twinkie dog. It was a relief, then, to find Fab Hot Dogs in Reseda still open and thriving. Best of all, the shop still makes an excellent Bald Eagle Ripper, the original owner’s homage to New Jersey’s Rutt’s Hut, “home of the ripper.” The dogs are deep fried just until the casing rips and on top, is a version of Rutt’s mustard relish, which at Fab is browner and said to include Hatch chile powder, shredded cabbage and carrots, garlic, oregano, onions, celery seeds, cider vinegar, and Düsseldorf mustard with sweet relish. Fab’s ripper dogs first got the attention of this paper’s late restaurant critic Jonathan Gold not long after it opened in 2008 and then Guy Fieri for a 2009 Food Network segment. Since then, Fab has become known not only for the ripper but for its many dog variations, including a very good Chicago dog with the right pickle, neon relish and sport peppers; several bacon-wrapped franks (with jalapeños and peppers on the L.A. Street dog; barbecue sauce and cheddar on the Kansas City dog, and Swiss cheese and baked beans on the Boston dog). A rotation of whiteboard specials includes a Santa Fe dog with Hatch green chiles and cotija cheese, and even a mac ‘n’ cheese dog. Together they make up what Gold once called a display of “the American frankfurter diaspora.”

Khartoum, Sudan – As drone attacks rain down on el-Obeid and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) tighten their months-long siege, the capital of North Kordofan has emerged as the latest flashpoint in Sudan’s grinding war of attrition.

Despite mounting international alarm and renewed US diplomatic pressure aimed at securing a nationwide truce, Sudan’s warring generals remain deeply entrenched. Both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the RSF appear locked in a pursuit of outright military victory, largely sustained by a continuous flow of foreign weapons.

Through the lens of the escalating crisis in el-Obeid, a grim reality is unfolding: Civilian suffering is increasingly weaponised amid polarised domestic narratives, while geopolitical manoeuvring repeatedly stalls any viable path to peace.

A strategic prize and international alarm

El-Obeid holds immense strategic value. Located 550km (340 miles) southwest of Khartoum, it acts as the primary gateway linking Khartoum to the vast Darfur region. The city is also a major military stronghold, hosting the SAF’s 5th Infantry Division, known as “Al-Hagana”, and has become a refuge for hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians fleeing violence elsewhere.

The looming threat of a full-scale ground invasion has triggered urgent global warnings. Recently, 38 international nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), alongside the UN and countries including Qatar, sounded the alarm over the escalating use of drones and the potential for mass atrocities, warning that el-Obeid could face the same devastation recently seen in el-Fasher.

Yet these warnings have failed to alter the calculus on the ground.

Polarised narratives of a stalled peace

Recent United States diplomatic efforts, led by Massad Boulos, an adviser to US President Donald Trump, have pushed for a comprehensive ceasefire. However, the push for peace has collided with absolute domestic polarisation.

SAF commander Abdel Fattah al-Burhan has firmly rejected unconditional truces, stating that the army will operate with the precision of “digging with a needle” until the RSF is entirely dismantled.

This deadlock reflects a deeply fractured political landscape. Fathi Abu Ammar, a Sudanese academic, told Al Jazeera that the SAF is primarily responsible for the prolonged suffering by obstructing peace initiatives and refusing to establish safe corridors for civilians to leave el-Obeid.

He accused the army of using the city’s residents as “human shields” to garner international sympathy, while arguing that the RSF is fighting to address legitimate historical grievances.

Conversely, Sudanese journalist and political analyst Yousef Abdel Mannan vehemently rejected these claims.

Speaking to Al Jazeera from Sudan, Abdel Mannan accused the RSF of widespread atrocities, including a recent drone attack on a girls’ school in el-Obeid and the systematic killing of thousands of civilians in el-Fasher, including patients inside the Saudi Hospital.

Abdel Mannan dismissed the US-backed truce proposals as inadequate measures that merely “treat the wounds of the conflict while leaving the root cause intact”, arguing that only a comprehensive political settlement, not a temporary ceasefire, can resolve the crisis.

He maintained that civilians in el-Obeid are not being held hostage by the army, but rather prefer to remain in their homes rather than face displacement at the hands of paramilitaries.

Foreign arms and the geopolitical deadlock

Beneath the domestic blame game lies a critical factor sustaining the conflict: Foreign interference.

David Shinn, a former US diplomat and assistant secretary of state for African affairs, noted that despite years of US engagement and sanctions targeting both SAF and RSF leaders, neither side has shown a genuine interest in halting the violence.

“There is a desire from both sides to continue fighting until one side wins,” Shinn told Al Jazeera.

The escalating use of uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) over el-Obeid underscores this external lifeline. “Neither the RSF nor the Sudanese army manufactures drones,” Shinn pointed out, meaning these advanced weapons must be imported.

He highlighted that the warring parties are actively backed by regional powers, pointing to the United Arab Emirates as a backer of the RSF, and Egypt and Saudi Arabia as supporters of the SAF, arguing that the conflict has transformed into a proxy war.

For the siege of el-Obeid to end and a genuine peace process to begin, the geopolitical spigot must be turned off.

Until the international community forces external actors to halt their military support, analysts warn that Sudan will remain hostage to a war its generals believe they can still win.

Brent crude edged 2.5% higher on Tuesday and seems to have steadied around $100 per barrel at the time of writing, as US-Iran negotiations stall.

On the other hand, WTI dropped over 4% and is trading around $92.6 per barrel.

Overall, oil prices were declining since last Wednesday as the framework for a peace deal, or at least a longer and more encompassing ceasefire, between the US and Iran was seemingly on the verge of being agreed.

However, Iran accused the US of breaching the current ceasefire after Washington carried out what it described as defensive strikes in the southern part of the country.

Iran’s foreign ministry stated that the US attacks in the Hormozgan province, where Iranian media reported hearing explosions early Tuesday, amounted to a “serious violation” of the fragile ceasefire that has been in effect for almost seven weeks.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said negotiations aimed at ending the conflict could require “a few days” to reach an agreement.

On Monday, US President Donald Trump also reiterated nuclear demands in a social media post, as tensions continue to surround the fundamental aspects of a possible agreement.

Investors appear to have mixed reactions to the developments with some markets seeming to price in a decrease in the probability that a deal is imminent.

In Europe, the Euro Stoxx 50 has fallen more than 0.7% while the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 is trading around 1% lower as we approach the close of Tuesday’s session.

The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, France’s CAC 40, Italy’s FTSE MIB, the Netherlands’ AEX and Switzerland’s CH20 have all dropped between 0.1% and 0.7%.

Over in Asia, Japan’s Nikkei 225 and Taiwan’s TAIEX closed flat, but South Korea’s KOSPI jumped 2.5% primarily driven by a continuous demand for AI-related equities.

However, US markets appear completely decoupled from other indices and the broader situation. Not only have WTI prices continued to fall on Tuesday but the S&P 500 also opened 0.6% higher.

Latest on the Strait of Hormuz

Both the US and Iran had signalled headway toward a memorandum of understanding that could end the conflict and resume maritime traffic through the blocked Strait of Hormuz, while allowing negotiators a 60-day window to tackle more complicated matters such as Iran’s nuclear activities and supplies.

In his latest remarks, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the Strait of Hormuz must remain accessible “one way or the other” as traffic through the chokepoint has dropped sharply, with only a few dozen ships currently using the route each day, compared with the usual 125 to 140 vessels.

Iran has continued to permit limited shipping, prioritising vessels connected to allied or friendly nations and arranging passage through state-to-state agreements.

Continuous reports of attacks in the Strait of Hormuz underscore how far from the normalisation of energy flows and other supplies the global economy still is.

On Tuesday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that a tanker experienced an external blast near the waterline on its port side.

According to the agency, the vessel was located about 60 nautical miles from Muscat, the capital of Oman.

UKMTO said the tanker and all crew members were unharmed, although a quantity of bunker fuel spilled into the sea.

This is the most recent reported incident near the Strait of Hormuz at the time of writing.

April 29 (UPI) — The United States has sanctioned 35 entities and individuals accused of overseeing a shadow-banking network that moved tens of billions of dollars for Iran, as the Trump administration flexes Washington’s financial might amid a stalemate in peace negotiations with Tehran.

The sanctions announced Tuesday come as U.S.-Iran peace negotiations came to a halt last week after Tehran said it would not participate in talks until the United States lifted its blockade of sea-based trade to the Middle Eastern nation.

Those blacklisted by the Treasury include several private companies known as rahbars, which manage thousands of overseas companies used by Iranian banks cut off from the international financial system to execute payments for Iranian trade.

According to the Treasury, these rahbar companies coordinate with Iranian exchange houses and front companies to conduct international trade on behalf of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran’s Armed Forces General Staff, the National Iranian Oil Company and other sanctioned entities.

“By dismantling these financial channels, we advance the administration’s policy in the conflict with Iran and underscore our commitment to imposing maximum pressure on Iran,” State Department spokesman Thomas Pigott said in a statement.

The punitive action was part of what the Treasury calls Operation Economic Fury, a branded escalation of President Donald Trump‘s broader maximum-pressure campaign against Iran.

Coinciding with the sanctions on Tuesday, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issued an alert to financial institutions over the risks they face for doing business with so-called teapot oil refineries in China, primarily in Shandong Province, that import and refine Iranian crude oil.

According to the alert, China is the largest purchaser of Iranian oil, and the Treasury has designated multiple small China-based refineries since March of last year.

“The United States will further disrupt illicit funding streams that finance Iran’s malign activities,” Pigott said.

“We will not relent in our efforts to deny Iran and its proxies the resources they use to threaten U.S. interests and regional stability.”

Trump first employed the maximum-pressure campaign strategy to coerce Iran into negotiations over its nuclear program in 2018 after unilaterally withdrawing the United States from a landmark multinational accord that sought to prevent Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Iran then breached its commitments under the deal, enriching uranium up to 60%, far exceeding the accord’s 3.67% but below weapons-grade levels.

Trump restored the maximum-pressure campaign after returning to office in 2025, and the United States bombed three major Iranian nuclear facilities that June.

The United States and Israel have since escalated their pressure campaign, attacking Iran in strikes that triggered a war now halted by a fragile cease-fire to permit peace talks.

Iran has imposed restrictions on energy trade through the Strait of Hormuz, prompting the United States to impose a blockade of Iran’s ports in response to what it describes as Tehran holding a major share of the world’s energy supplies hostage.